74 comments:

With both the Russians and Chinese it is essential to be correct, consistent and firm. Concessions to either gain no favor, and the underlying ex-Communist worldview is one of cutthroat diplomacy with a huge chip on their shoulders.

Calling their bluff does not bring risk, but letting them feel there is a point of weakness they can exploit does. (See Korean War).

President Obama doesn't understand Putin or China. At least with Muslim countries he thinks he understands them which gives him at least some steadiness. Lots and lots of risk here.

Haha... Russia is a joke. This is akin to China saying it'll invade Taiwan if we were to recognize Taiwanese independence. Both are bluffs, Russia's is more ridiculous, but still diplomatic balderdash.

I've heard lots of bluster from Russia about such things over the years.

But never a coherent explanation of what part of missile defense for Poland constitutes a "threat" to Russia, let alone one that would justify (to the extent they pretend to need justification) such pre-emptive destructive force.

None of the US missile-defense systems are very good at offense - and frankly if they were worried about that, well, we still have a lot of ICBMs.

Thus I can only really read it as "we want to threaten Poland (and the Ukraine, etc.) and you're going to make that hard, so we're all mad".

What missile defenses of the sort the Russians think we have deployed do is this:

They create the worry that the US might decide to execute a first strike while using the missile defense to reduce the damage from the Russian second strike to 'acceptable levels'. Such missile defenses aren't really all that great outside a first strike scenario, because the number of missiles and other targets can easily overwhelm the system. But they boost the first strike threat and the number of Russian missiles and other nukes is much much smaller than back in the 1980s.That's why they're nervous. Have we totally forgotten the Cold War?

Missle defense for Poland is a threat to Russia only in the sense that it might impair the effectiveness of a Russian missle strike on Poland. Why isn't anybody asking Russia why it would want to attack Poland? What are these people planning?

Oh, no! It sounds like we might be confronted with some kind of an evil empire, or something. Better get ready to teach schoolchildren to cover their ears and get under their desks. Either that, or maybe we can find some cool guy who would be willing to implement some sort of smart diplomacy.

I have a Polish son, a Magyar daughter and son , and a little farther afield an Albanian daughter. So let's just say that I have some dogs in this fight.

The Russians are playing chess, not whack-a-mole. The audience is Eastern Europe - not us. And between Russian incursions into Georgia, their sabre rattling, and the west's (including especially us) irresolute response, the message to mitteleuropa is TOE OUR LINE! You have no real protectors. They don't need tanks on the ground like in the old days.

Touchy. I'm merely pointing out that your 'arguments' are a set of assertions that boil down to "well, I think he's doing fine!" And I'm sure you do. But there's not a whole lot there to convince the un-convinced.

The story is obviously false because Russia is a member of the United Nations and the United Nations Charter states "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations." Thanks heavens for the UN!

Just so I don't totally blow you off as nuts: what exactly is it about the President's "handling" of the Arab Spring that you like? Be as detailed as you like; who knows, you might point out something I've missed.

Elian Gonzalez is laughing at Chen for thinking a American Democrat would value thinks like life and liberty.

Really, I want to know, at what point should a democrat stop kissing the boots of tyranical thugs? Or is this why little Chrissy Matthews gets a tingle all up and down his leg when the Dear Leader speaks. It's just bred into them to be victims. A masochist just waiting for a sadist with the right whip to come along.

Now that I think of it, that might be why they worship at the alter of Zero. The cold haughty manner. The sneering at the little people. The eternal mask of a real person underneath the cartoonish grinning exterior. The indifference to other people.

Wait a second!

I think I might have stumbled on something...

President as "Leave It To Beaver" Archetype.

Romney, the Ward Cleavor father figure. Wise, yet remote. There to solve our problems deus ex machina style, but remote from the intimate lives of his "children".

Barry as the Eddie Haskell. Says all the right things in front of the adults, but exudes smarm and evil to those who can see.

Moochie as June Cleavor. Approachable by the kids but really running the household, and more importantly Ward Cleavor. Sweet and loving when things go her way, the punisher when they don't.

Jehu said... What missile defenses of the sort the Russians think we have deployed do is this:

They create the worry that the US might decide to execute a first strike while using the missile defense to reduce the damage from the Russian second strike to 'acceptable levels'. Such missile defenses aren't really all that great outside a first strike scenario, because the number of missiles and other targets can easily overwhelm the system. But they boost the first strike threat and the number of Russian missiles and other nukes is much much smaller than back in the 1980s.That's why they're nervous. Have we totally forgotten the Cold War?

For this Poland must sacrifice her security? Appeasing Russia got her what? the last time. Confronting the bear can be costly, but worth it in the end. See Finnland and the real Solidarity movement.

Does anyone think the Russians would have threatened an act of war if we had a real President?

For the person who thinks Obama has done a good overall job on foreign affairs, in what area, specifically, do you think he has done so? He is a joke to our real enemies, despite his fascination with blowing shit up by remote control. Please name one area, and try to make a case, where our national interests are better off because of Obama's policies.

Does anyone think the Russians would have threatened an act of war if we had a real President?

For the person who thinks Obama has done a good overall job on foreign affairs, in what area, specifically, do you think he has done so? He is a joke to our real enemies, despite his fascination with blowing shit up by remote control. Please name one area, and try to make a case, where our national interests are better off because of Obama's policies.

Why shouldn't the Russians feel free to threaten war? We do it freely, (as in our threats against Iran)...despite it being a war crime to do so. Why should we have the privilege and not others? Or, put another way, how can we expect others NOT to follow our example?

This is not even to get into our actual acts of aggressive wars against other nations.

Robert Cook said...Why shouldn't the Russians feel free to threaten war? We do it freely, (as in our threats against Iran)...despite it being a war crime to do so. Why should we have the privilege and not others? Or, put another way, how can we expect others NOT to follow our example?

This is not even to get into our actual acts of aggressive wars against other nations.

Bob? Can I get some examples? I don't think we're reading the same history books.Or maybe I should ask, Are you a pacifist?And then go from there.